d00p

That old bastard has a hell of a grip!

Let's see who will be first to defend the ricer.

Myself, I would have shot the SOB if I was a cop.

Just as an aside, why do Palm Beach officers sound like Yankees?

Shit, good call.

 

Glad he is ok.

DAMN!!!!!!!!!! that guy looks just like my father n law.........

Damn he does too. Secret life?

 

Top Cop attitude, He Has It!

I saw this posted on a motorcycle blog.

The story is that the guy had broken the speed limit (118 in a 65) and the cop had clocked him but didn't hit the lights. He saw that the Motorcyclist was stopping for a light so he pulled up behind him got out of the cruiser and just grabbed him. The motorcyclist panicked when a man just grabbed him out of the blue and responded by riding away.

It all makes a lot of sense, and it shows that the officer was overzealous. He should have verbally engaged the motorcyclist before assaulting him. A little speeding does not warrant going "hands on", an unprovoked physical attack on an unaware target is poor policing.

118 in a 65?  kidding, right? what happens when mr. biker plows into a minivan full of kids @ 118 mph?

You get a sponge for the cleanup.

Bull fucking shit.  I hope the cop got some stick time on the pos.



 

 

Then he will have committed a moral action that is worthy of being considered a crime of malice. However the one does not presupposse the other, motorcycles (and many cars) can be safely operated at rates of speed that exceed the posted limits. Much in the same fashion that shooting a rifle at a range is in no way comparable to shooting a rifle at people. Exceeding the posted limit is malum prohibitum, and not worthy of a surprise beatdown. There are far too many laws on the books now that prohibit utterly benign actions because some people percieve that they lead to actual crimes that do damage and hurt people. Driving a motorcycle fast is no more morally wrong then shooting a gun, it is simply using a machine. It is only when you slam into or shoot an innocent person does the banal and innocous act of using a machine transform into a moral action worthy of consideration as a crime.

The act of physically engaging a suspect without him knowing you are there is not appropriate for anything malum prohibitum, it should only be reserved for actions which are malum in se. Any other attitude will only reinforce the militirazation of the Police and further erode our Liberty.

Call me a wild eyed nutjob if you will, but I do not approve of the Police having license to hurt you for committing "paper" crimes. I don't think the law should care that you have a gun, smoke weed or drive fast, the law should only respond when you hurt someone. NOT to the perception that what your doing increases your likelehood of harming someone, if we hitch to that horse it will carry us all the way to not having any rights at all. As every action could be argued as negative solely on the basis of its "potential". The courts have ruled many times that the Police do not exist to prevent indivduals from coming to harm, but only to respond after the fact to apprehend the criminal and dissuade others.

It is cancerous to the very concept of law and order to have "crimes" which are purely subjective. It is responsible for the change in attitudes towards law enforcement. Whereas once seeing a Police officer would comfort Citizens, knowing that there would be someone to help with the situation if someone was done an injury. Now when we see Police we instinctively fear whether or not we are doing something he may percieve as wrong.

We are losing our freedoms in the name of preventing "Might have been". A crime is something that does injury to a persons property or person, not thier sense of safety.

blah, blah, blah.

all i see is one biker (assuming from your screen name) defending another. you want to run 120 mph and turn yourself into a greasy spot on the side of the road? fine, do it on a track somewhere where you are not endangering others for your thrill.  what you're saying is I should go target practice on the interstate next time i want to take one of my rifles out.  after all, I am just using a machine for what it was designed for, and it won't be a problem unless I actually hit someone, correct?  did i get it all?  

wonder if the local police will be as understanding.  

I do own a bike, (A Gs 500 not a Katana, it couldnt break 100 if it wanted to) but I'm just arguing from principle here. I don't think you can have a free society where everything that "Could" cause problems justifies the use of force. I don't give a fuck if the guy hit an arbitrary number that was higher then the arbitrary number higher then the one on a sign next to the road. If he actually hurt someone then I would care. The one act does not equal the other in terms of justified police violence.

I don't like the "surprise police beatdown" aspect of this, and I would like to live in a society where such violence by the state is reserved only for situations where actual harm has been done.

Man I bet his feet were toes were hot as shit

because a shit ton of them are.  went to the academy with a few myself who work for PBSO.



 

Creative defense stategy is creative.

So much fail in your logic I don't know where to start........

Well....for sure....he dies.